Skepticism

EVENTS

I drink your tears!

The tasty sweet tears of rage and frustration. Oh, I am so enjoying the current flood of email into my in-box. It’s not fair to keep it to myself, so I thought I’d share a sample.

Young Republicans

Sad little man, calling kids names . . . There is so much more hate and intolerance on the left it simply isn’t funny.

Look below.

Educator???

Professor Myers,

Have you forgotten that it’s your job to help students learn how to think, and not to bias them to think only like you? Also your demonization of those who don’t share your political views, as shown by the words you choose to describe them (“assholes”), reflects poorly on your education. Scientists never justify their work via fallacious Argumentum ad hominem, which is usually based on emotion, not on facts.

The only reason someone wants to destroy or suppress written information that doesn’t echo their views is that they don’t have any facts to refute it. If you strongly believe in your political views, why don’t you participate in moderated debates and let the students decide for themselves?

Scientists also do not deny facts clearly in evidence. The students behind the racist rag are young assholes. Are we seriously supposed to debate whether black people are discriminated against? Really?

yes to ends justifies the means

Those on the left these days clearly believe the “ends justifies the means” for liberals everywhere think nothing of physically attacking and physically destroying anyone and any idea they “think” is wrong. Free speech was once an ideal of those on the left – no longer.

It is. But you do understand that free speech has limits, right? Or why are you upset with me exercising my free speech…which is all I’ve done?

Tolerance and diversity.

You sir are a hypocrite. You call conservatives assholes. And conservative youngsters assholes in training. You also compared the north star paper to KKK And yet you have the hypocrisy to say ” treat their scattered papers as hate-filled trash and dispose of it appropriately. ” you are an asshole, communist who preaches hate. You liberals assholes preach tolerance and diversity, and yet you have none for anyone who disagrees with your opinion. You might not be criminally liable for the theft of the North Star papers but you sure as hell are personally responsible. You are not only a pathetic pitiful excuse for a human being but also a scum sucking, hate preaching hypocrite. How many young men and women have you brainwashed by preaching hate and intolerance? Haters like you should not be allowed anywhere near a classroom. People like you have destroyed this country. After listening to you insult people with differing opinions and attacking freedom of speech it’s obvious you would be much happier in a country like North Korea. I can only pray that the university of Minnesota Morris shits cans you out of your cushy little job in academia. And then you would actually have to work for a living. Until such a blessing to humanity occurs you need to shut your fucking mouth until you learn tolerance for other people.

Shut up until you learn to tolerate speech you disagree with! I think we’re done here.

You are a BITCH!

hey you little man…grow up! what a sad excuse for a human you are…you and OBAMA are both pieces of shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did I just get compared to the president of the United States?

I looked up your picture – that’s what an intolerant bigot looks like

Typical of your ideology – free speech only for those who comply with the bigots.

Just read a story about how you view conservatives as ‘ass-holes’ and that you think that people should not read the campus conservative newspaper at your school.

Nice job being tolerance of people with opposing points of view from your own. Good example to set as an educator.

I guess you are just another one of those liberals who is for free speech as long as it agrees with your views.
And if teaching does not work out for you maybe you might try a different line of work – IRS or BLM agent might be perfect choices for you.

Conservative viewpoints: fine. I might disagree with them, but I agree that they should be allowed to be expressed. Why are you so freely associating “conservative” and “racist”?

You do have a right to say what you think, but to call conservatives “uneducated”, when you must resort to profanities when describing them, shows who lacks an educated mind.

I find it alarming how liberals like yourself feel they have the right to say and do whatever is necessary to advance their views, but won’t tolerate someone that disagrees with them.

Again, another person who hasn’t read the North Star. I’d really be interested to hear from somebody who had, who still wants to claim it as a voice for conservatives.

U

U are on the wrong side of history and life. U must Undo the terrible wrong committed when you were born. U must for the sake of justice abort yourself immediately for Barack’s glory. Be a hero, do not delay.

That doesn’t even make sense.

Piece of shit

That’s all he had. A subject line, and then he was too intellectually exhausted to continue.

Asshole

You call conservatives assholes but you are the one filled with hate.

I didn’t use Trayvon Martin’s dead face as a prop in a crusade against racial diversity.

Being an Alumni of the U of M…

I am 100% offended by your actions against the Morris North Star paper!!!

Your criticism of the paper apparently is that it was mocking minority students…Well, you sir went way beyond mocking!!!

Some day I wish folks like you would look in the mirror…I can dream, right?

I won’t return your hate speech with more hate speech (so I won’t call you names), but with a prayer that you can find it in yourself to rise se to a level equal to your education.

I went beyond mocking? The response to that paper has been universal: it is deplorable.

Twerp

So, you think you’re pretty smart!? From the things I’ve read, it sounds like you’re well on your way to setting your pompous liberal ass out for a good kicking. Do a favor for the rest of us in the real sciences – keep your frickin’, misguided political opinions to yourself!

Will you do the same?

ASS HOLE DEMOCRATS

HEY YOU PIECE OF SHIT….CALLING REPUBLICANS NAMES ..NOT VERY NICE…YOU ASSHOLE….CANT WAIT FOR THE REPUBLICANS TO TAKE CONTROL OF THIS COUNTRY AGAIN…OBUMMER HAS REALLY FUCKED IT UP…AND YOU ..YOU PIECE OF SHIT…THEY SHOULD FIRE YOUR ASS…17 TRILLION IN DEBT….NO ONE IN THE WORLD IS AFRAID OF THE U.S. ANYMORE..OBUMMER KEEPS SAYING YOU CROSS THE RED LINE..AND BOY ITS GOING TO BE TROUBLE..EVER COUNTRY OUT THERE JUST LAUGHS AT THE U.S….CANT WAIT TO GET THE REPUBLICANS BACK IN CONTROL …I GUARANTEE YOU PUTIN WOULD NOT BE DOING WHAT HE IS DOING IF WE HAD A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO IS NOT AFRAID OF HIS OWN FUCKIN SHADOW…..IN THE MEAN TIME ASSHOLE BACK OFF THE YOUNG REPUBLICANS…BECAUSE YOU TIME WILL COME..HAHA…

There’s always one who loves his capslock key.

Why don’t you move to a country that suits your totalitarian ideological worldview?

It’s shameful that you and your pathetic so-called ‘university’ share more in common with Herbert Marcuse and Gramsci than with the intellectual tradition of western liberalism. It’s shameful that your opinion of democracy and liberty is virtually indistinguishable from the perfidious view of Recep Tayyıp Erdoğan. What you have in common with the aforementioned is an illiberal, intolerant, and tyrannical ideology advanced, in Machiavellian and Orwellian fashion, under the label of democracy and liberalism. Once liberalism has served its purpose, facilitating “the long march,” the left’s true ideological bent towards totalitarianism is revealed. And you are quite the exemplar, perched in one of the institutions Gramsci targeted, a western university, preaching a jihad against free speech and intellectual freedom, the very vehicles that delivered you and your ilk to a position of influence in society.

But just think that there are countries fully committed to your worldview. You could move to Cuba, Red China, Venezuela, North Korea, Russia, and Belarus, to name a few. You could trash all manner of authentic, classical western liberal literature and, instead of being taunted, you could be praised and revered by your fellow travelers on the “shining path.” Imagine yourself in the middle of a frenzied crowd of kindred “souls” (yes, we know your religion is atheism) in some Middle East anti-western Shangri-La burning an American flag and a cheap Chinese reproduction of the U.S. Constitution. A true left-wing oasis. No dissent. Lot’s of stupid and pliant drones ready to receive your illiberal instruction and light up the night sky with huge bonfires of western literature. Come to think of it, it’s a lot like the University of Minnesota-Morris.

There’s also always the pretentious one, who drags out obscure figures from history and calls atheism a religion and while complaining about defending free speech, wants me to move to North Korea.

A different view point

Has any conservative ever provided a view point that was contrary to yours yet remained valid in your eyes? If yes, how far off was it? If no, what made yours the most valid? Must students always agree with your viewpoint or do you encourage them to do the research, and reach their own conclusion?

Libel and dead black boys are not points to be argued.

I’m sure there’ll be more. It’s not very interesting, though: they clearly haven’t read either what I wrote, or what the North Star wrote, and are just parroting the twists Fox News made…which actually justifies my comments about Fox News.

The mindless army of Fox propagandized trolls are on the attack. Are any of these guys capable of stepping back and looking at the facts first before their knee jerk self righteous blathering has to spew out? Are any of them capable of saying something mmm original?

But seriously I’d be scared if someone like Glenn Beck got a hold of a story like this and ran with it. Recall how his deranged tides foundation follower reacted to his propaganda. A small percentage of these guys (I do mean guys) are seriously deranged.

Daily KOS used to have a weekly feature hilighting the best emails received from the knuckle-draggers that week. It was highly amusing, to say the least. I’d say you are making progress in obtaining sufficient material for a similar feature.

Also, when I started reading the emails, I was wondering if there’d be at least one in all caps. I’m thankful that the wingers never disappoint in that regard.

It’s gold, Professor. Gold!

Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaidensays

I looked up your picture – that’s what an intolerant bigot looks like
Typical of your ideology – free speech only for those who comply with the bigots.

This is so fractured, I understand how it might be misinterpreted.

“I looked up your picture – that’s what an intolerant bigot looks like” can be translated:

“Me looking up your picture [after knowing nothing about you but what a slanted news outlet released] is what an intolerant bigot looks like”

“Typical of your ideology – free speech only for those who comply with the bigots” can be translated:

Typical of those of your ideology, you make statements I do not wish to engage. Thus I advocate free speech on for those who comply with the bigots, who, as we recently learned, look like me. This will protect me from experiencing dissent in the future.

Frankly, that comment was astonishingly self-aware. You, however, couldn’t understand because you were engaging in improper exegesis.

====================
Also:

burning an American flag and a cheap Chinese reproduction of the U.S. Constitution.

Would that blockhead prefer that protestors burn a first printing constitution? A signed first printing?

Or does he think that somehow in the US laser printers won’t spit out 7 cents worth of toner and paper if it carries a copy of the constitution…unless $1000 is donated into the “too valuable to burn fund”?

I find quite a lot admirable about the US constitution, but if it will help this writer get over some delusions, I’ll quite happily print out a cheap Canadian copy of the constitution and burn it. The writer deserves some pity, after all.

Were there any that were, at least in principle, worth engaging with? You having the time to spend on that project is another matter, just wondering if there are any potentially rational critics in the bunch…

I wonder if they all are just assuming, based on Starnes sort of leaving it entirely out, that the content of this rag is actually just regular old conservative stuff and you’re going too far, or if they’re all racists scumbags, too?

How dare you you quote people directly and put those quotes on your publicly readable website where people can comment and disagree with you? How dare you do this on the Internet where people can create their own websites and say whatever they want?

I GUARANTEE YOU PUTIN WOULD NOT BE DOING WHAT HE IS DOING IF WE HAD A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO IS NOT AFRAID OF HIS OWN FUCKIN SHADOW….

YAH, BOY WE SURE SAW THAT WHEN GW PUSHED THE RUSSKIES OUT OF GEORGIA IN ’08……HAHA. Oh, wait, that didn’t happen….
Dickweed.

And I loved this smug bullshit,

You could trash all manner of authentic, classical western liberal literature and, instead of being taunted, you could be praised and revered by your fellow travelers on the “shining path.”

Because verbally trashing an overtly racist rag ( that is, expressing an opinion) is just like communist book burning and totalitarianism….if you have a degree, give it back, you have work to do yet, poor fool…

I won’t return your hate speech with more hate speech (so I won’t call you names), but with a prayer that you can find it in yourself to rise se to a level equal to your education. – U of M alumni [sic]

Oh balls, it’s impossible to parody this crap properly. Voltaire’s prayer and Russell’s observation demonstrated true yet again. I’m off to start drinking heavily. Okay I never really stopped, but I think it’s time to move to eyeball vodkas and anally administered tequila.*

Louis

* I am aware these are both really bad ideas, for so many reasons, but hey I’m so clearly exaggerating only an utter fuckwit would bother to comment on their unwiseness and offer me advice, right? Right?

Wow. I honestly don’t know how you manage to put up with this stream of ignorant abuse, particularly on top of the three law suits. I think this would get to me eventually. I’m just glad to see you are made of sterner stuff and that you are able to bat away their stupidity so nonchalantly (your 8 limbs may help with this). Keep up the good work. The world needs more people like you to ridicule and expose the regressive bigots that hold civilisation back.

No dissent. Lot’s of stupid and pliant drones ready to receive your illiberal instruction and light up the night sky with huge bonfires of western literature. Come to think of it, it’s a lot like the University of Minnesota-Morris.

Yes. A lot like that. The great works of Western literature and poorly written racist satire. Pretty much interchangeable.

Louis @25 — yes, I’ll be the one to offer you advice, being an utter fuckwit in training: Remember, the eye-dropper is for the vodka, the turkey-baster for the tequila, and not vice-versa. You could get case of pink-eye if you confuse them later in the evening.

@30. It’s a well know fact that atheist professors force their students to renounce Jesus or face getting an F in class, how else is a good liberal college supposed to operate. After all we atheists hate the god we know exists because we love sin. At least that’s what some Xians I’ve talked to have told me in the past.

Cheese! They sound like the inhabitants of Moe’s Bar, when Moe is in the back and Homer and (weirdly) Barney aren’t around.

[dons “Nelson” mask and points] HA-ha!

Of course, if they had the ability to converse and the potential to be honest, I’d simply talk with them sincerely. They know they’re unhappy, and that their dishonesty about that (and everything else) keeps them unhappy all the time about everything.
But they focus on how embarrassing it would be to admit they’re only human like me and every other human. And they’re angry at being merely human.

There’s not much anyone else can do about that, save limit the effect of their hatred.

I must not have got the memo on how I am supposed to “define” myself. Or that there was some particular opposition I’m supposed to be against because I am an atheist. It’s interesting because i had never felt any type of opposition towards religion (in general).

First of all, I now see why you are an ass-ociate professor and not a professor at some small school nobody has heard of. You are a pitiful excuse for an educator. And yes, you did just get compared to POTUS, as a “piece of shit”. Hey, congratulations! Evidently it shows your true intellect. Obviously, you are not “fine” with conservative viewpoints. Because if you truly are/were “fine” with them, nobody outside of UMM would even know of or give a rats ass about your meaningless existence. Trayvon Martin?? REALLY!?!?! You truly are pathetic. If you care so much for “dead black boys”, maybe you should move to the nearest inner city ‘hood and start volunteering. Afterall, the overwhelmingly majority of “dead black boys”, came by the hand of another black boy. So until those statistics dramatically change, cry me a f’n river! Another white male left winger who “cares so much” for the plight of African Americans, who are only waiting for the next hand-out. You’re an atheist also?? Congratulations, I’ve heard there are no atheists in foxholes. Have fun burning in hell. Otherwise, I will pray for you…….to burn in hell sooner rather than later.

I’ve heard there are no atheists in foxholes
And I’ve heard this guy blows goats.

But, on this stupid saying – I was having a conversation with someone about it the other day, and they kept saying “you don’t know what goes through someones head right before they die”. Which made me ask them about people who commit suicide. ‘Cause if there truly are no atheists’ in fox holes, then you’d think there wouldn’t be a lot of suicide, that whole thing where you’d go to hell.

‘Cause if there truly are no atheists’ in fox holes, then you’d think there wouldn’t be a lot of suicide, that whole thing where you’d go to hell.

I’ve never understood why committing suicide was a sin, you are just trying to hang with the big guy a little earlier than usual. Is this similar to when you get into trouble for opening your Christmas presents early?

What amazes me is all these Faux News teat-suckers actually READING an article!
True fact: The logo on F-N rotates because when it was static, their mouth-breather audience kept the tee-vee on that one channel so long that it would burn the image into the screen.

It occurs to me that since ‘there are no atheists in foxholes,’ why don’t Christians carry around portable foxholes and have atheists sit in them for a moment. It would have the added benefit of converting people with out having to blather out all that mythological BS in the process, so it would be more efficient too.

Jebus, the roar of “freeze peach”, don’t criticize my fuckwitted opinion, is very loud. The avowed racists obviously don’t understand the concept of free speech, where the content of anything stupid they say can and will be criticized in public….

I’ve never understood why committing suicide was a sin, you are just trying to hang with the big guy a little earlier than usual. Is this similar to when you get into trouble for opening your Christmas presents early?

I was told it was an extension of “no killing”; apparently killing oneself counts.

This can be especially tragic in Catholic families, what with the whole “repent to a priest” thing. The one who commits suicide isn’t capable of penance, after all, and therefore goes to hell.

I’ve never understood why committing suicide was a sin, you are just trying to hang with the big guy a little earlier than usual. Is this similar to when you get into trouble for opening your Christmas presents early?

I was told it was an extension of “no killing”; apparently killing oneself counts.

Really? I always heard it explained that ending your own life was defying God’s plan for your life (i.e. if he wants you to suffer for another three decades, you’ll take your lumps and like it), and therefore a sin against God.

Really? I always heard it explained that ending your own life was defying God’s plan for your life (i.e. if he wants you to suffer for another three decades, you’ll take your lumps and like it), and therefore a sin against God.

Basically it is this plus the no killing thing: Only God is allowed to kill. Because it’s his plan and his Authoritah and blah blah blah. And the Biblical basis for the argument is minimal at best, but that’s just par for the course.

And Faux News did its job right: I bet half these blinkered jackasses wouldn’t dare to be angrily bleating at Myers if the Author Extraordinaire hadn’t conveniently scrubbed out any details of the original content that PZ was objecting to. Though obviously the one that PZ just mentioned in the comment is just racist enough to probably not give a shit about that detail. “Freeze Peach!!” and “Youz discriminatin aginst Republicanz!1!!1″ is the only narrative they get, is the only one they want, and is the only one they will continue to accept.

Reading through the e-mails again: Do Faux News thralls have an Obama bashing quota they need to meet or something? It seems like some them are trying their damndest to bring Obama into whatever the fuck their already ill-conceived gripe is.

It seems like some them are trying their damndest to bring Obama into whatever the fuck their already ill-conceived gripe is.

Gee, if you are a racist fuckwit, then having a POTUS who is even half-black is the ultimate insult. You must show respect for a position occupied legitimately (via election of the people) by a person who is black…..

ATTENTION ATTENTION: THIS IS THE WINGNUT EMERGENCY BROADCAST SYSTEM. THERE IS STILL A BLACK MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE. I REPEAT: A BLACK MAN. AND HE IS CHANGING LAWS ABOUT HEALTHCARE!!!!! STOCK UP ON GUNS!! MORE GUNS!!!! FASTER!!!! CALL YOUR SENATORS AND MAKE SURE THEY KEEP OBSTRUCTING! REMEMBER TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE FUND PRESERVING SCALIA’S PICKLED HEART! AND WHATEVER YOU DO, GUNS!!!

I paged through a number of the comments on the Fox News page, and it really is shocking that it occurred to none of them that maybe students just took all the papers and that it might’ve been a popular publication. Instead, they’ll believe the conspiracy theory that a professor used his sciency chemicals to steal them off the rack.

Taking some of these together with “conservativeface”, I’m sensing a new meme on the right: Conservatives as a poor, oppressed minority. (I wish.) I know Christians have been doing it for a while, but the idea of political conservatives as a class that need to have their delicate feelings protected, is new to me.

Sure, make me choke back a laugh into a snort loud enough to be heard the other end of the shop. A customer asked me what was so funny. I live in a conservative rural town you bastard; I didn’t dare repeat your alert! :)

Really? I always heard it explained that ending your own life was defying God’s plan for your life (i.e. if he wants you to suffer for another three decades, you’ll take your lumps and like it), and therefore a sin against God.

*shrug*

I suspect there’s a dozen arguments for why its a sin to commit suicide.

But how do they know God’s plan wasn’t for me to commit suicide? Maybe it was. Its obviously in God’s plan for people to die, so why is that one category of cause written off as “not god’s plan?”

And for that matter, how easily thwarted is God’s plan if anyone could throw it off the rails like that?

Taking some of these together with “conservativeface”, I’m sensing a new meme on the right: Conservatives as a poor, oppressed minority. (I wish.

The irony of that “conservativeface” article by Ben Shapiro: It was about how Colbert was making conservatives look bad by acting like a sexist and racist conservative. What does the author do to dispel that stereotype? By complaining about how mocking conservatives for their political ideology is Just As Bad as fucking blackface. And this from a person also saying that Colbert is such an over-the-top caricature of right-wingers that he couldn’t possibly earn anything but the viewer’s ire. Yet Colbert’s character is far more sympathetic than Ben Fucking Shapiro, trying to pretend that Colbert’s satire is akin to goddamn blackface. Fucking damn. It only confirms that satire can never be as ridiculous as real right-wingers.

FossilFishy:

Sure, make me choke back a laugh into a snort loud enough to be heard the other end of the shop. A customer asked me what was so funny. I live in a conservative rural town you bastard; I didn’t dare repeat your alert! :)

If it was a conservative rural town, you should have warned them about how Obama is still President and is still black. They need to know this. Or else something something something gay Kenyan godless Muslim abortion death panel of the gun control New World Order.

Something is very wrong with public school education in the US of A. Seeing these kinds of comments and the staggering lack of knowledge, the degree of misinformation and the extent of emotional immaturity and more or less uncontrolled rage on display, the people writing those comments were let down by their governments state and federal in more ways than one.

How dare you you quote people directly and put those quotes on your publicly readable website where people can comment and disagree with you? How dare you do this on the Internet where people can create their own websites and say whatever they want?

I’ve never understood why committing suicide was a sin, you are just trying to hang with the big guy a little earlier than usual. Is this similar to when you get into trouble for opening your Christmas presents early?

rorschach
“Something is very wrong with public school education in the US of A.”

LDS training ain’t much better, it seems.
A pair of ‘elders’ were kind enough to pay me a visit this morning. During our conversation, I mentioned that Joseph Smith was a convicted con man who was ‘encouraged’ to move west from New York State by unfriendly former associates. One elder offered that Smith never moved west. “Missouri and Illinois aren’t west of New York?” I replied.
Kids these days… they don’t even watch South Park.

And concerning former criminal code provisions making suicide illegal, one of my law profs said that it was a really stupid law, since clearly only attempted suicide could ever be charged. He also said that he thought the legal theory was that only the state would have the right to decide an execution of a citizen. That everyone had value to the state, and shouldn’t go wasting resources like that.
He was pretty cool.

I was told it was an extension of “no killing”; apparently killing oneself counts.

That may be the official doctrine in some places, but what I heard was that the ban on suicide came back when Christians really were a persecuted minority under the pre-Constantine Romans, because people were committing suicide to gain early access to their Heavenly rewards and escape the pain of life on Earth. And so suicide was made officially a sin because the early Church leaders were worried the Church would be empty if they didn’t.

Sort of like how the Cross became a symbol of Christianity despite the ‘no graven images’ commandment because it was really difficult to recruit early Roman non-members when they couldn’t easily explain why they didn’t have some sort of image or symbol to represent their god for worship.

But how do they know God’s plan wasn’t for me to commit suicide? Maybe it was. Its obviously in God’s plan for people to die, so why is that one category of cause written off as “not god’s plan?”

Because free will or something like that. They can’t have God make you do something, or they wouldn’t be able to condemn it (by saying He condemns it). Therefore, if you take matters into your own hands, it’s a sin most of the time.

And for that matter, how easily thwarted is God’s plan if anyone could throw it off the rails like that?

Well, their God is really quite small and surprisingly powerless despite being awarded attributes like omnipotent, infinite and omniscient.

So, I have not read all the comments here, but I am sure I am not the only one to go to that Fox website and basically troll them. Two basic themes – 1) they don’t understand that the first amendment applies to government behavior (they never do) 2) they don’t understand that PZ is also allowed to have free speech too.

by Derek Thompson – in 815 Google+ circlesJan 27, 2014 – Fox News is losing younger viewers at an even faster rate than its competitors. With a median viewer age now at 68 according to Nielsen data …

1. The average age of Fox News viewers is 68.

That means the fractured English and general gibberish is from people who went to school 2 generations ago. Or three.

2. So, if the average educational achievement levels have been going down, imagine what the average young Fox News viewer’s language skills are like. Assuming they can figure out how to turn on a computer and use a keyboard.

If it was a conservative rural town, you should have warned them about how Obama is still President and is still black. They need to know this. Or else something something something gay Kenyan godless Muslim abortion death panel of the gun control New World Order.

That may be the official doctrine in some places, but what I heard was that the ban on suicide came back when Christians really were a persecuted minority under the pre-Constantine Romans, because people were committing suicide to gain early access to their Heavenly rewards and escape the pain of life on Earth. And so suicide was made officially a sin because the early Church leaders were worried the Church would be empty if they didn’t.

Oooh, that’s pretty cool actually. I’ll have to look into that.

ck

Therefore, if you take matters into your own hands, it’s a sin most of the time.

So, everything anyone ever does? If I chop down a tree for which God had some unspecified use, that’s a sin?

JacobSchmidt: I ask because the way she phrased “his horrible views”, referring to PZ’s views, caroline could either mean
1. That PZ’s views are “horrible” according to the Fox News Folks and should be what they focus on.
2. That PZ’s views really are “horrible” and should be the focus of the discussion for everyone.

I was requesting clarification before I assumed the latter and started an argument that didn’t need starting.

Rural Aussies do tend to have a poor in regards to knowing that Obama is their evil black Muslim overlord. Maybe Murdoch will finally return to his land of birth and ensure that you are all thoroughly informed with The Gospel According to Fox, shortly before you officially join Americaland.

JacobSchmidt:

So, everything anyone ever does? If I chop down a tree for which God had some unspecified use, that’s a sin?

Honestly, hard to say whether ANY interference with God’s perfect and unknowable plan counts as a sin. But, needless to say, pretty much anything you can do is a sin, because there are a ridiculous number of sins. Christian “Jesus Magic Means Kosher Is Not Needed!” Dogma, plus a dash of Cafeteria Christianity lets the True Believers selectively ignore certain “sins” when it is convenient. But when they want to come up with a reason to call somebody a sinner? Well the rules that they stole from the Jewish tomes they tacked their religious pamphlets onto are more than enough for that job.

So yes, pretty much everything is a sin. Not so much because there is a coherent logic behind all of it, as much as that the Bible is a nonsensical mish-mash that argues for everything and its opposite.

Myers, you do good work,. I am not referring to your research, about that I know nothing at all, this though is interesting stuff. Insight into the ‘thinking’ of conservatives. Dropping a meme into the blogosphere elicits a maelstrom of incoherent, illiterate and vehement blowback from the dull penumbra of the right wing fringe. I say the penumbra because of the lack of death threats. So far.

Has anyone done any research into where the publishers of North Star get their money?All that printing
does not come free. What exactly is their tax status? Are they a non-profit? Are they all volunteer or do
some people get paid? All interesting questions.

Louis – I am with you on the heavy drinking idea but I’ll take a pass on the unconventional methods of
imbibing. Whiskey by mouth works very well.

Has anyone done any research into where the publishers of North Star get their money?All that printing
does not come free. What exactly is their tax status? Are they a non-profit? Are they all volunteer or do
some people get paid? All interesting questions.

About Northstar in particular, I don’t know or much care. Most likely they are funded by the proverbial outside agitators.

In general there are rightwing groups that specifically fund these campus propaganda rags. You can find them easily on Google.

The rightwing has huge amounts of money to toss around. Diluted by the fact that much of it is wasted on scammers and moochers. This was even a cover story on Time magazine a few weeks ago.

1) they don’t understand that the first amendment applies to government behavior (they never do)

I don’t want to put words in your mouth so could you explain what you mean by this?

It sounds like you mean that the 1st amendment means that only government is not legally allowed to censor people but non-government people are legally allowed to censor all the want. This may or may not be technically true. (I don’t know enough about law.) But I’m personally very reluctant to embrace such an argument even if it is true. I actually *do* very much believe in free speech both in letter and in spirit and I will defend to the death the North Star’s right to publish whatever shit they want. So a “loophole” argument to the 1st amendment seems weaselly and something we should avoid even if it is technically valid.

What is, in my opinion, appalling about this Fox whining is that calling the North Star out for its disgusting tactics and saying “the North Star has worn out its welcome and must go; Treat their scattered papers as hate-filled trash and dispose of it appropriately” can not in any way shape or form possibly construed as advocating censorship. It’s merely a statement that the North Star is hate-filled trashed and should be reviled. That is *not* in any spirit or letter censorship. It is simply speech (and again, I’ll defend that speech to the death too, and honestly feel better about doing so, but that’s immaterial.) To stretch it as a “incitement to commit crime” is a preposterous stretch. To even consider it as an incitement of crime *is* an appalling act of censorship and violation of free speech.

On an off-topic (off because it is not in any way reflective of anything that actually happened), even advocating censorship is protected free speech. After all, every-one is entitled to the opinion that the other opinion should be silenced and the have every right to say so. They just have no right whatsoever to act on it. And they should have every expectation that such an attitude will be called out and not tolerated. … And, oh yeah, having speech tolerated is not a right. The speech itself is, but the reaction to it, not at all.

It sounds like you mean that the 1st amendment means that only government is not legally allowed to censor people but non-government people are legally allowed to censor all the want. This may or may not be technically true.

It is technically true. People have been fired for speech done on their own time and on their own dime. Private businesses are not required to carry speech that they object to (barring certain exemptions like “common carrier” laws). And so on.

What caroline probably meant was the “free speech” versus “Freeze Peach” thing. Free speech simply means you cannot be censored by the government (and most people would like to say business has no business censoring either, but the law doesn’t work that way). Freeze peach is the imaginary right not to be criticised publically, and the imaginary right to use other people’s platforms for your own speech.

In __The Road to Wigan Pier__ Orwell speculated that socialism may express a hypertrophied sense of order, like those people who must wash their hands for two minutes and thirty seconds, every hour on the hour from 0600 to 2100 or those people who rearrange the socks in the underwear drawer twenty times a day. Elsewhere (e.g., “Raffles and Mrs. Blandish”, “Inside the Whale”) Orwell suggests that a preference for authoritarian politics expresses vicarious sadism. Mises (__Socialism__) suggested that socialism originates in a primitive revenge fantasy. Perhaps it’s a hangover from a time when the successful hunter got disproportionate access to females and the most attractive females got disproportionate access to successful males. You enhance your odds of reproducing if you (a male) sabotage Bill Gates of T. J. Rogers, or if you mess up Tom Cruise or (a female) Aishwarya Rai or Nicole Kidman.

Reading all those, burdensome as it was, was instructive. Certain thoughts and turns of phrase, such as the references to excreta, show up repeatedly. I suspect that there are far fewer people writing than the number of posts. I’ve seen that quite a bit from the right wing. They, evidently, have a great need to be seen as one of many. As opposed to the reality of being a overly vocal minority.

Charles Chi-Tat Ng (Chinese: 吳志達/吴志达 (Cantonese pronunciation: [ŋ̩̏ tsītàt̚]); Pinyin: Wú Zhìdá; born December 24, 1960) is a Hong Kong-American serial killer. He is believed to have raped, tortured and murdered between 11 and 25 victims with his accomplice Leonard Lake at Lake’s ranch in Calaveras County, California.

Freethought or free thought is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[1][2][3] The cognitive application of freethought is known as “freethinking”, and practitioners of freethought are known as “freethinkers”

Whatever you thought (I use the term loosely in your case) the definition of ‘freethought’ was, you were wrong.

Atheists define themselves by their opposition.

Ah, you’re a sleazeball psychic.
You don’t know the first thing about how I (or anyone else here) defines themselves. Hint: it’s not “by my opposition”.
You suck at mindreading you fucking fool.

That’s a mistake.

Since you don’t know how anyone defines themselves, there is no mistake made fool.

“Materialist” neutrally describes the materialist worldview.

I still can’t figure out what your fucking point was here.
I can’t say I really care either, given your contribution to this thread thus far.

It’s very telling that Kirkpatrick’s example of a serial killer was Charles Ng. (I’m surprised it wasn’t Wayne Williams.) I wonder how long he had to scrabble around to find one that wasn’t lily-white American. Ted Bundy? Gary Ridgeway? John Wayne Gacy? Never heard of them! Hey Malcolm! You could have gone with Andrei Chikatilo! He was wunna them Commies!

Your ignorance is evidently unbounded. Orwell was a democratic socialist, and remained so to the end of his life. Von Mises’s fuckwitted speculations and your relaying of them as though they were of any significance deserve nothing but derision – this was a man, after all, who explicitly repudiated the use of empirical evidence in economics, believing he could derive everything from unevidenced first principles (i.e., pull it out of his arse).

Can’t get any more authoritarian than the christofascists of the Tea Party. Orwell would despise you. It’s all there, sadism for the poor, nonwhite, women, gays, anyone who isn’t a warped, angry old white male. Thoughtcrimes, Doublespeak, Newspeak.

It’s very telling that Kirkpatrick’s example of a serial killer was Charles Ng. (I’m surprised it wasn’t Wayne Williams.) I wonder how long he had to scrabble around to find one that wasn’t lily-white American.

Perhaps it’s a hangover from a time when the successful hunter got disproportionate access to females – Malcolm Kirkpatrick

Incidentally, empirical study indicates that existing and recent forager societies are usually highly egalitarian, with resources including the meat of hunted animals being shared according to well-defined conventions, and the degree of polygyny (hence, differences in men’s reproductive rates due to “access to females” – note the pseudo-scientific terminology) being low, certainly in comparison to later agricultural societies, where elite men frequently “owned” multiple women. Of course, one must be cautious in extrapolating from modern forager societies to the Pleistocene, but what evidence there is points in the opposite direction to the one you and your fellow glibertarians would like. But then, you clearly follow von Mises* in your contempt for empiricism.

* I’m amused that you omit his “von”, which of course gives a clue to his highly privileged social origins.

I put Malcolm Kirkpatrick conservative racist in Google and got a few hits. He has been around the web.

Quote from blackconservativewoman blog: Edited for length.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said…

The government of a locality is the largest dealer in interpersonal violence in that locality (definition). Every law on the books is a threat by the State to kidnap
delete

Nowadays, in the US, “liberal” means “socialist”.

Here Malcolm just copies and pastes himself as we saw above.
In __The Road to Wigan Pier__, George Orwell speculated that a socialist orientation may express a hypertrophied sense of order, a compulsion akin to obsessive handwashing or folding the towels in the linen closet 15 times a day. Elsewhere (e.g., “Raffles and Mrs. Blandish”, “Inside the Whale”),
Orwell suggests that a preference for authoritarian politics indicates vicarious sadism. In “Socialism”, Ludwig Von Mises suggests that socialism expresses a revenge fantasy.

The tools available to State actors are violence and threats of violence.
delete
You cannot enjoy the fantasy of punishing the exploiters, the price-gougers and the money-lenders unless the State has authority to enforce minimum wage laws, price controls, and rent control laws. Liberals (socialists) buy this ticket when they vote.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick is just a Loonytarian posting lies and gibberish. An Ayn Rand fanboy. He calls Obama et al. a socialist. In realityland, he is what used to be called a moderate Republican. Enough said.

Kirkpatrick from the same source as above and edited for length because this guy babbles a lot.

What you call “the public school system” is a set of policies which features:
1) Compulsory attendance (truancy) statutes applied to minors.
2) Compulsory attendance (educational neglect) statutes applied to parents.
3) Compulsory tax financing of schools.
4) Laws (in many US States) and district policies (in others) which restrict parents’ options for the use of the taxpayers’ age 6-18 education subsidy to schools operated by State (that is, government) employees.
5) State (that is, government) ownership of school facilities.
6) A State or District mandated curriculum.
7) In many States, mandated collective bargaining for government-school employees.

You can opt out of our civilization any time and some do. Free country and all that. It’s called going Galt Gulch. Of course, like Chris McCandless they usually end up dead and rather quickly. But it is your choice.

Has any conservative ever provided a view point that was contrary to yours yet remained valid in your eyes? If yes, how far off was it? If no, what made yours the most valid? Must students always agree with your viewpoint or do you encourage them to do the research, and reach their own conclusion?

Did this guy do his own reasearch on this issue by …reading PZ’s original post? Hypocrisy highlighted.

Cthulhu, Malcolm Kirkpatrick is a dumb crackpot. I can’t resist. My comments are in bold.

What you call “the public school system” is a set of policies which features:
1) Compulsory attendance (truancy) statutes applied to minors.Not true de facto. These laws are not enforced or enforceable

2) Compulsory attendance (educational neglect) statutes applied to parents.De facto not enforced. But they should be. We live in a complicated civilization. Not educating your children sets them up for failure. It’s child abuse.
Kirkpatrick is assuming parents own their children. They don’t. They are citizens albeit not with all the rights of adults.

3) Compulsory tax financing of schools.True. So what? The USA with public education became the world’s largest economy and the last superpower. Public education works. You can find countries with low levels of literacy. They are poverty stricken third world countries.

4) Laws (in many US States) and district policies (in others) which restrict parents’ options for the use of the taxpayers’ age 6-18 education subsidy to schools operated by State (that is, government) employees.Same as above. You can send your kids to private schools or homeschool them if you want. But we can’t afford a nation of illiterates.

5) State (that is, government) ownership of school facilities.So what. It works well and is done everywhere.

6) A State or District mandated curriculum.Chosen indirectly by the citizens. This is a democracy you know

7) In many States, mandated collective bargaining for government-school employees.Yeah we get it. You hate unions because people use their Libertarian free will to organize and negotiate contracts. Freedom only applies to ultra-rich white guys.

Whenever I see the phrase von Mises I think of his younger brother Richard and it takes me a while to process that the guy they’re referring to is the one with no redeeming features. Sorry about the off – topic post – I just felt like mentioning it for some reason.

A pair of ‘elders’ were kind enough to pay me a visit this morning. During our conversation, I mentioned that Joseph Smith was a convicted con man who was ‘encouraged’ to move west from New York State by unfriendly former associates. One elder offered that Smith never moved west.

I could give this the benefit of the doubt. Colloquially “move west” has a less literal meaning, “move to the western United States or the wild west” They might have interpret “move west”in that way. Unless they responded “No Missouri isn’t west of New York,” you’re grasping at straws.

I GUARANTEE YOU PUTIN WOULD NOT BE DOING WHAT HE IS DOING IF WE HAD A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO IS NOT AFRAID OF HIS OWN FUCKIN SHADOW

This reminded me of a Roger Waters song called Me or Him in which he plays clip from a radio talk show host (I’m not actually sure if it’s real or not – I’m guessing it is) who says “Do you really think Iranian terrorists would have taken Americans hostage if Ronald Reagan were president? Do you really think the Russians would have invaded Afghanistan if Ronald Reagan were president? Do you really think third-rate military dictators would laugh at America and burn our flag in contempt if Ronald Reagan were president?”

Preach intolerance, and when you get criticized, complain about the lack of tolerance for your views. Preach free speech and threaten and tell to shut up everyone who dares to ask if there may be limits. Preach hate, then accuse anyone of hate speech who would rather try to get along with those that you hate. Never forget to insist you have a right to defend yourself. And, of course, call anyone a racist who insults your beautiful white skin by saying you’re not superior, not even to a nigger. Because anti-racist is just a code word for anti-white. Mourn the decay of a society that does not even allow to shoot anyone in the face who calls white kids names.

I could give this the benefit of the doubt. Colloquially “move west” has a less literal meaning, “move to the western United States or the wild west” They might have interpret “move west”in that way. They might have interpret “move west”in that way. Unless they responded “No Missouri isn’t west of New York,” you’re grasping at straws.

Um…..

admittedly moving to Pennsylvania or New Jersey would not be “moving west” but you are aware that Missouri was well into the frontier and very much part of the western United States, don’t you?

I grew up in Missouri, and really didn’t think of it as being in The West. But it certainly was at one time the frontier, as most places were, and I now say it qualifies as Western by many standards.

The Gateway arch was set up in St. Louis, which is in eastern Missouri, as the symbol of the western advancement. Lewis and Clark started from St. Louis. The Missouri River drains much of the Wild West. The country could be divided along the Mississippi River, and Missouri is on the western side. The first Wild West pistol duel took place in Springfield, featuring Wild Bill Hickok. The Oregon and Santa Fe trails started in Westport. Baldknobbers. The James Gang. Laura Ingalls Wilder. Daniel Boone.

(Kirkpatrick): “Atheists define themselves by their opposition.”
124 (Tony): “Ah, you’re a sleazeball psychic.
You don’t know the first thing about how I (or anyone else here) defines themselves. Hint: it’s not “by my opposition”.You suck at mindreading you fucking fool.”
I know this much: (1) Tony has a foul mouth AND (2) “atheist” means “a-” (prefix meaning “not”) + “theist” (root, meaning “one who holds the doctrine of theism” according to my Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.) Merriam Webster Online defines “theism” as “the belief in the existence of a god or gods”.
Consider all the things in which you don’t believe: ghosts, intelligent extraterrestrials visiting Earth in lying saucers, the Loch Ness monster, telekinesis, telepathy, etc. Do you call yourself an “a-Loch Ness Monster-ist”? I don’t. Why call yourself an “a-theist”? As I said: atheists define themselves by their opposition. That is a mistake. A neutral term for the materialist world view is “maerialist”.

(Raven, 135): “I put Malcolm Kirkpatrick conservative racist in Google and got a few hits. He has been around the web.”
I just put ” ‘Obama’, ‘flying spaghetti monster’ ” into google and got (it said) 252,000 hits. Therefore…

When several atheists tell you that you’re mistaken and no atheists agree with your assumption about atheists, there’s an extremely good likelihood that your assumption is full of shit. And please, don’t whine about me telling you you’re full of shit. If you don’t like to be told you’re full of shit, then there’s a simple fix, don’t make statements that make it obvious you’re full of shit.

Malcom Kirkpatrick, I only identify myself as an atheist when I am trying to tell religious people that I am not one of them. I never think of myself as a materialist, and wouldn’t like that term if it meant that I couldn’t believe in dark energy.

You seem to think that “atheist” means “antitheist”. Well, I think you are wrong, and I will say that I am an atheist long enough to drive that point home.

And really, people like you have made me anti-theist, not in the sense of being against gods, but in the sense of being opposed to theism.

What you call “the public school system” is a set of policies which features:
1) Compulsory attendance (truancy) statutes applied to minors.
2) Compulsory attendance (educational neglect) statutes applied to parents.
3) Compulsory tax financing of schools.
4) Laws (in many US States) and district policies (in others) which restrict parents’ options for the use of the taxpayers’ age 6-18 education subsidy to schools operated by State (that is, government) employees.
5) State (that is, government) ownership of school facilities.
6) A State or District mandated curriculum.
7) In many States, mandated collective bargaining for government-school employees.

You remind me of the argumentative vegetarians I knew in college who would argue: “You are not a vegetarian if you eat eggs or dairy. You are at best just an ovo-lacto-vegetarian. As ovo-lacto-vegetarianism is just a conditional exception to vegetarianism as a whole, it is not valid practice in its own right. By definition, you are simply being hypocritical, non-committed and effectiveless.”

This is bullshit not because of any actual bearing to vegetarianism or to any other subject under discussion but because words and definitions do *not* dictate concepts. A diet which includes dairy and eggs but not the meat of animals is a valid self-expressed concept, regardless of any vocabulary or lack thereof. Vocabulary and etymology has nothing to do with the condition of any actual concepts.

Atheism is not defined by what it excludes. It is a world-view that does not involve gods or religion. Theism is a world-view that sticks in a god on top of it. Both are simple basic concepts. Neither is dictated by it’s etymology or definitions to be “defined” by what it is not or what it is a modification from. Even though both can be argued semantically to be so.

First rule of totalitarian leadership: Those you rule must never know if any particular act runs afoul of the law or not, and all subjects must be potentially guilty of violations of the law.

Joke from Nazi times: The legal system is to be simplified.
1) Whoever does anything or fails to do anything is punished.
2) The punishment follows the Healthy Feeling of the People™.
3) The Healthy Feeling of the People™ is set by the governor.

Perhaps it’s a hangover from a time when the successful hunter got disproportionate access to females and the most attractive females got disproportionate access to successful males.

To entertain this hypothesis you first need to show that there ever was such a time. At first glance it looks pretty obvious that there was, but at second glance it just shows you’re not familiar with the social lives of chimpanzees, bonobos, orang-utans or even gorillas.

First rule of totalitarian leadership: Those you rule must never know if any particular act runs afoul of the law or not, and all subjects must be potentially guilty of violations of the law.

That also helps spot laws made on the totalitarian spirit; too broad to be effectively enforced, they’re meant to hang a threat over the targeted group so most or all members may be treated as criminals at any time.

Some of the law codes I’ve seen are ridiculously fine-grained. They achieve obscurity because nobody is going to read all of them. How many people living in Spokane years ago knew it was illegal to hang men’s and women’s underwear on the same clothesline?

I once was the only person who knew it was illegal to ride a bicycle down one side of one block of one street in downtown Muskegon, Michigan, and also the only person with the info for figuring out why. That stretch of street used to be where the city busses had their central transfer station, long ago, and the law was still on the books. I had worked for the bus company, and had seen their old map, and I was working on a bicycle-commuting project, so I had the knowing.

I also noticed that most of the laws in that town, especially the older ones, were restrictive and conservative. There were laws AGAINST miscegenation, cohabiting and sodomy, but no laws compelling anyone to live with a same-gender, different-race lover. I suppose the laws forcing people to allow other races to eat in the same restaurants may have seemed like compulsion, but at the time I just thought you could eat at home if you wanted.

So these conservatives going up in flames because they think PZ did something like what they do, is just silly. (I watched a few minutes of The Passion of the Christ, tonight, and amidst at the torture porn, I kept thinking that God was finally getting a taste of the shit humans endure.)

How many people living in Spokane years ago knew it was illegal to hang men’s and women’s underwear on the same clothesline?

At the time, all of them I don’t doubt. That one has all the hallmarks of a good old fashioned American moral panic. I also suspect that within 10 years after its passing, 95% of the people who’d clamored for it had totally forgotten about it.

What does limited government mean in practice? What is the point of having a government in the first place? What does fiscal responsibility mean in practice? What do people say when they fear for their secure national borders, and what do they do once they have the political power to do something about it?

If somebody approaches me on the street and asks for a light, I tell them “Sorry, I’m a non-smorker.” does that mean “I define myself by my opposition to smoking”?
If my uncle is offered a beer, he’ll tell you “I’m a tee-totaller” does that mean “he defines himself by his opposition to alcohol”?

Declaring yourself to be non-X doesn’t automatically mean that you’re anti-X. And it certainly doesn’t mean that you “define yourself” by your “anti-X-ism”.

The only reason most people call themselves atheist and need to repeat it so often is because we are constantly confronted by obnoxious theism that’s blatantly in our faces and tries to force us to live according to theist norms we don’t give a flying fuck about.

It took the government in the country where I live (Belgium) ages to come to the agreement that I have the right to say when MY life isn’t worth living anymore in MY eyes (i.e. legalise euthanasia) … and knowing that cancer and Alzheimer’s are common in my family, you can be damn sure I drafted a euthanasia declaration the moment it was possible. And still the Holier-Than-Thou Party (Christian “Democrats”) have been obstructing that law every step on the way, constantly being egged on by the Asshole-in-Chief, Arch Bisshop Leonard.

So yeah, I will say “I am an atheist … I don’t give a fuck about your alledged god’s rules.” every time a religionist thinks they know better than I do. And you can be damn sure that if UFO-believers were to become as obnoxious (and influential) as theists are, it wouldn’t take long for people to clearly describe themselves as “a-UFOists”.

You see, that one actually is funny! The belief that conservatives ONLY believe in limited government! And are consistent in the desire to see limits imposed! Laugh Fucking Riot.

Look at what conservatives actually want. Why is it that limited government increasing its influence regarding marriage, making sure gay people can’t get in? Why is that limited government siphoning in and spending tons of funds to wage needless wars? Why is the limited government trying to spew out regulations about what women can do with their bodies? Why is the limited government waging a war on drugs? Why is the limited government imprisoning the largest number of people in the world? Why is this non-racist limited government disproportionately imprisoning minorities?

Do you fucking believe that conservatives ONLY position is limited government and keeping America “safe”? Because if you do, you are the kind of useful idiot that the Republican party thrives on. Good fucking work, Sherlock.

(Raven, 162) Trivial. Evading and ignoring the points I made.”
Raven ignored the point I made. That Google returns #X hits on a search for a ” ‘Y’, ‘Z’ ” combination indicates nothing about a connection between Y and Z. Consider “Obama, Flying Spaghetti Monster” (252,000 returns).

You could get similar results with a search “Al Dente, Z”, where Z is any of the terms “Al Dente” used in his searches (comment 170).

It’s called validation of the measurement. It doesn’t mean much when electrodes attached to plants react when people scream abuse at the plants (as reported) if electrodes attached to Styrofoam balls also react when people scream at the Styrofoam ball (as later reported, by other experimenters).

Malcom Kirkpatrick, that is what you choose to respond to? You pick up on some trivial aspect of what you consider an error, and twist it into a lecture from your smugness. Meanwhile, the raucous laughter at the foundations of conservatism, and so much else you could be addressing, gets nothing from you.

I know some other folks who act the way that you do. One is 16, the other one got fired.

Good for you for standing up for the minority students at your University. Have any of the young a**holes tried to explain their anti-Black racism that fills their rag? Seems like they are flinging poo to obscure how racist they are.

And yes, Wingut tears are delicious. Hopefully, we’ll taste them in November 2014 and November 2016. They’re already flowing given the success of the ACA.

Off topic, but Vaiyt asked a civil question.
(Vaiyt,173): “And this is bad how?”
In abstract, the education industry is an unlikely candidate for State (government, generally) operation.
Numerous lines of evidence support the following generalizations:
1) As institutions take from individual parents the power to determine for their own children the choice of curriculum and the pace and method of instruction, overall system performance falls, and
2) Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents (“Well, duh!” as my students would say).

I see a libertarian has come to tell the atheists all about the joys of the corporate feudalism he wants installed throughout the world.

Tell me, Malcolm, why is it that libertarians are so held in contempt by normal people? Is it your rabid distrust of society? Is it your narcissistic self-absorption? Is it your innate selfishness? Or is it some other characteristic which makes the rest of us regard you with the same attitude we take to a rotting, maggot infested, dead dog?

So, does anyone think that if Kirkpatrick and his buddies got their way, and education was entirely privatised, that education vouchers would last more than 5 minutes? After all to libertarians taxes are an “initiation of force,” so taking their precious money and giving it to other people, even for an inarguable societal good(and I’m sure you can find some libertarians who argue that not everyone needs to read and write etc.) isn’t acceptable.

This is Indian country. It says a lot, those laws still being on the books.

Jesus fuck, it sure does. Anyone would the slightest sense of decency and with a half-way functioning brain would notice that shit and want it removed from the laws ASAP. I mean, for fuck’s sake, they are letting murder be legal through sheer apathetic negligence. Every fucking legislator who had an opportunity to change one of those laws yet did nothing deserves the fucking boot. What the fuck is wrong with this country?

I’m neither a libertarian nor a Libertarian. At least, friends who apply this description to themselves would not apply that label to me.

(Al Dente, 197): “ … has come to tell the atheists all about the joys of the corporate feudalism he wants installed throughout the world. ..”

Al pretends to read minds. “to” is a statement of intention. Maybe the error enters in the different expectations we have of the effects of competitive markets.

(Al Dente, 197): “… Tell me, Malcolm, why is it that libertarians are so held in contempt by normal people? Is it your rabid distrust of society? Is it your narcissistic self-absorption? Is it your innate selfishness? Or is it some other characteristic which makes the rest of us regard you with the same attitude we take to a rotting, maggot infested, dead dog?”

Why are strident anti-libertarians (around here, anyway) so coarse? Dunno. I’m no mind reader. I would not presume to assert the attitude that a “normal” person takes wrt libertarians.

Aww, the Psychic Sleazeball Tone Troll is back.Malcolm Kirkpatrick, I hope one day you’ll realize the substance of a comment is more important than the tone. Your first comment here was offensive, but contained no harsh words. My responses to you have mocked you and contained invective because of the insulting comparison you drew between PZ and a rapist/murderer. That you think using naughty words (most, if not all of which are considered bad in large part bc of religion–and hey! I’m an atheist, so I don’t give two shits about people recoiling in horror from FUCK) is worse than dishonestly comparing someone who has never raped, tortured or murdered anyone to someone who *has* raped, tortured, and murdered people is fucked up.

Actually, it does. Most policies that enhance parent control (e.g., tuition vouchers, tuition tax credits, relaxed restrictions on homeschooling, small school districts, charter schools) will enhance system performance.

(anteprepro, 202): “ … Malcolm couldn’t be arsed to show how his utopian alternative fixes these Horrible Horrible Things, but rest assured, they are still Horrible Horrible Things. …

You don’t have a voucher fetish, you just happen to cite a bunch articles talking about the magical and wondrous might of vouchers. Riiiiiight.

Most policies that enhance parent control…will enhance system performance.

Again, system performance improving doesn’t stop taxes from being required. Doesn’t stop mandatory attendance. Doesn’t stop teachers from needing unions. Doesn’t abolish the minimum wage. Doesn’t obviate the need for child labor laws. So is it just blatant handwaving all the way down with you?

Because the worst thing about totalitarian countries are requiring an education. Because only totalitarian countries would possibly think that letting education be a privatized, for-profit enterprise is a bad idea.

Nice attempt to poison the well though. Great work.

So, yeah: wild mischaracterization of the argument and childish name-calling.

Your allegation of mischaracterization remains to be proven. As for name-calling: welcome to Pharyngula. I will fetch you a fainting couch.

So, yeah: wild mischaracterization of the argument and childish name-calling.

Nope, accurate all the way around. You are the childish one thinking private education should use public monies in any way–unless the schools will also take the ones the public system would like to get rid of.

So, yeah: wild mischaracterization of the argument and childish name-calling.

Still more hurt fee fees. Anteprepro called you a gibbertarian. I suspect that’s a mashup of gibberish and libertarian, and that certainly fits with your opinions thus far. If you’re going to hang around here for any length of time, you need to ditch your whining about tone.

Why are strident anti-libertarians (around here, anyway) so coarse? Dunno. I’m no mind reader. I would not presume to assert the attitude that a “normal” person takes wrt libertarians.

(coarseness is such a baaaaaad thing)
Have you ever stopped to think about the impact libertarian philosophy would have on people? I have. If libertarian policies were put into full effect, people who don’t have power and wealth would suffer. Deregulations and eliminating government assistance are but two examples of libertarian beliefs. Both of those would lead to increased suffering, but hey, it wouldn’t affect libertarians (or so they think), so they’re cool with both. Which makes them selfish assholes deserving of coarseness and invective.
Think. It. Through.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick, I hope one day you’ll realize the substance of a comment is more important than the tone. Your first comment here was offensive, but contained no harsh words. My responses to you have mocked you and contained invective because of the insulting comparison you drew between PZ and a rapist/murderer. That you think using naughty words (most, if not all of which are considered bad in large part bc of religion–and hey! I’m an atheist, so I don’t give two shits about people recoiling in horror from FUCK) is worse than dishonestly comparing someone who has never raped, tortured or murdered anyone to someone who *has* raped, tortured, and murdered people is fucked up.

This.

Don’t you dare fucking tone troll us after what you’ve said, Malcolm. Maybe if you apologize for such a disgusting remark, then you might have a semblance of a standpoint by which you could act smug and lecture us about tone. Until then, you are ridiculously fucking hypocritical.

(Tony, 213): “… If you’re going to hang around here for any length of time…”
Probably not. I passed through a couple of years ago. Things haven’t changed much. The signal to noise ratio doesn’t reward the time spent here (unless one enjoys noise).

One last reading recommendation: compare and contrast the tone of Richard Dawkins’ __The God Delusion__ and Daniel Dennett’s __Breaking the Spell__. I’m very much a fan of Dawkins as an explicator of evolutionary biology. I suggest that the style he applies to his anti-religious publications and lectures works against him. Read Dennett to see how to do it right.

(Tony, 213): “… If you’re going to hang around here for any length of time…”
Probably not. I passed through a couple of years ago. Things haven’t changed much. The signal to noise ratio doesn’t reward the time spent here (unless one enjoys noise).

Well then, BUH bye cupcake.

I’m very much a fan of Dawkins as an explicator of evolutionary biology. I suggest that the style he applies to his anti-religious publications and lectures works against him. Read Dennett to see how to do it right.

Ah, you’re a proponent of there’s a right way and a wrong way to argue. Do you even recognize that the tone of a particular argument might work to convince you, but not others? Do you realize that some people respond to invective laden arguments, but not to so-called ‘civil’ arguments? Do you realize that people are not monolithic, and that different styles of argumentation reach different types of people?

PZ has blogged about a range of topics, such as rape, abortion, feminism, sexual harassment, climate change, gun control, & libertarianism. Threads like these often contain quite a bit of ‘signal’, but then you’d know that if you bothered to read them.

Oh, and given your comments here (especially your initial turd) it is especially ironic that you complain about the ‘signal to noise ratio’ at Pharyngula.

Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaidensays

You may claim not to be a libertarian but you do an extremely good imitation of one. Your school voucher fetish is so close to a libertarian argument as makes no difference, especially when complaining about “compulsory taxing.” If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck and looks like a duck….

It’s also ironic that Malcolm follows up his “signal to noise” whine with a whine about tone. Because we haven’t argued about that vapid position to death already!

Malcolm, a signal that it is repetitive enough is noise. A signal that isn’t novel enough is noise. A signal that is an utterly unoriginal, misinformed, uncritical, and unreflective statement is just noise. You are a hypocrite, through and through.

In abstract, the education industry is an unlikely candidate for State (government, generally) operation.

I’d say it’s a prime candidate, because it’s a common good that works best when it’s equal across the board.

Numerous lines of evidence support the following generalizations:
1) As institutions take from individual parents the power to determine for their own children the choice of curriculum and the pace and method of instruction, overall system performance falls,

Do you know what “evidence” means? Hint: it doesn’t mean “conjecture with no data to support it”. Where in the real world did parental control succeed? Where did institutional control fail? If you don’t have citations, at least some examples would help.

Why do you think parents, and not, say, qualified educators, are the best judges of both curriculum and pedagogy?

2) Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents (“Well, duh!” as my students would say).

What does “politically adept” even mean? As in, children of politicians and people with connections get the best education in detriment of others? As opposed to, say, children of rich parents in a purely private system?